Kuldip Nayar: Jinnah didn’t flaunt his principles, Gandhi and Bhagat Singh will remain relevant

Yes, what can you call it except a coincidence. I was born on August 14, 1923 in Sialkot. But it’s important to note here that I was born first, Pakistan was formed later.

I am not a Pakistan supporter, but I am not against Pakistan also. I want that there should be peace and friendship between the two countries and people of both the countries should interact more with each other, relationships improve both at the government level and between people of both the countries and pluralistic nature of both the countries remains intact.

It’s true that Pakistan was founded on the basis of religion but on August 13, Jinnah had clearly said that every person in the country is free to visit temple, gurudwara and a Masjid. Just a day before Pakistan was born, Jinnah had separated politics from religion.

Unlike other leaders, Jinnah never bragged about ideals nor was keen on lecturing. I remember once he had come to deliver a speech in the college I studied. Jinnah was wearing a pair of small specs and a green colour suit. But the audience there were very few in number. So one of my friends, Habib, who was a Kashmiri and a member of Muslim League asked us to attend that lecture. Around that time the Hindus had started going with the Congress and Muslims with Muslim League. But it would have been better had he not parted ways with India.

See, I never met Gandhi face to face. But I saw him in the lawns of Birla House. After partition when I came from Pakistan, I stayed with my aunt in Darya Ganj. I left Pakistan On September 13 and reached Delhi either on September 15 or 16. And ran straight to Birla House just to catch a glimpse of Mahatma Gandhi. At that time, he was having a stroll in the lawn. I had greeted him from outside the gate. But yes when he was assassinated, I covered the entire incident as a reporter.

This happened during the time I was working with the home minister Govind Vallabh Pant. Nehru was the prime minister. Nehru was upset with the report of parliamentary committee in which Pant ji had written ‘subsidiary’ before English. Pant ji was the president of that parliamentary committee. Then Pant ji asked me to go to every library of Delhi and consult all the dictionaries I can get hold of. I consulted many dictionaries and then told Pant ji that the word ‘subsidiary’ and ‘additional’ are used in almost the same sense. It’s not that Nehru had any contempt for Hindi. He wanted that even non-Hindi speaking people should also know Hindi. But the people from North-East and South did not know Hindi at all. Therefore, to avoid any protests on this issue immediately after Independence, he wanted that Hindi should not be implemented till the non-Hindi speaking people accept it as their own language.

I met Nehru on 2-3 occasions. Nehru’s thinking was modern. On the issue of English too this very thinking of his worked. He believed that English is the world’s language. I had seen Nehru in Sialkot for the first time. I think it was around 1939. He had come there on an election campaign. I remember that he was wearing the same attire as he used to wear, he was with Sheikh Abdullah but he had not put a rose on his jacket.

Yes I am impressed with Bhagat Singh’s personality. He died, sacrificed his life for the country at the young age of 23. He had very strong revolutionary thoughts. This idea of writing a book on him occurred to me in Lahore in the 80s. I had gone there for some Punjabi convention. I saw that in that hall there was one and only one picture and that was of Bhagat Singh. I asked the organisers why have you put  Bhagat Singh’s picture here. Here, there should be a picture of Iqbal who saw the dream of Pakistan. They said, only one Punjabi has sacrificed his life for the country and that is Bhagat Singh. I decided at that time that the personality and philosophy of Bhagat Singh must be presented before the country. Although almost everything has been written about him, but it was essential to explain and clarify the difference between a revolutionary and a terrorist on the basis of Historical investigation and facts.

Bhagat Singh is as relevant today as he was earlier. In fact, I will say, that his relevance will increase as time passes. He was young, he was a hero. The youth will always be impressed with his thoughts. The relevance of Gandhi too will increase but the difference between the two is the difference of means and that will remain. Bhagat Singh was not ready to give up the path of violence and Gandhi did not approve of violence at all. He had even asked Irwin to release Bhagat Singh. But neither was Bhagat Singh willing to give up his ways nor did the Britishers want to release him. Gandhi ji could not save him because of his principles and not because he feared Bhagat Singh’s popularity.

Yes, it’s true. I started as a reporter in Urdu. When I came from Pakistan to India, I started living in Chandni Chowk, Delhi. A man lived in the same compound, and kept coughing constantly all day long. I used to get disturbed by his coughing. When I enquired, I came to know that this gentleman is Maulana Hasrat Mohani. I went to him. He asked me what did I do. I told him I was a reporter. I used to write for ‘Wahadat’ at that time. Gradually we became friends. He gave me two valuable advices: First- give up writing poetry and second was start writing in English. There is no future of Urdu in the country.